HarrySettle Senior Member 663 posts Joined Jun 2004 Location: Bemidji, MN More info | Dec 01, 2004 11:06 | #1 I'm looking at lens options again and have been looking at the Canon 24-70 in the 3.5 aperture as I don't really have a requirement for 2.8, and the price difference is wide. I have also been looking at the new Tamron 28-85 2.8 but I'm wondering if I'd then miss having the 24mm.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
kawter2 Goldmember  2,046 posts Likes: 1 Joined Aug 2004 Location: Orange County, CA More info | Dec 01, 2004 11:10 | #2 didnt know there was a Canon 24-70 that isn't a 2.8L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Dec 01, 2004 11:29 | #3 OOPS! 24-85. Thanks, the numbers are getting confusing the more I shop.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
planesh00ter Member 92 posts Joined Apr 2004 Location: Kuwait More info | Dec 01, 2004 12:09 | #4 I bought mine used and it was a great bargin, a exellent lens, and fast
LOG IN TO REPLY |
LouDawg Member 112 posts Joined Oct 2004 More info | Dec 01, 2004 14:50 | #5 I have the 24-70 f/2.8L and have used the 24-85 f/3.5-4.5. The 24-70L is a MUCH better built lens and much higher quality overall. The f/2.8 is extremely useful for me for indoor sports and candids without flash--not sure if that applies to you. The 24-85 however, is not a terrible lens and would be good as start in that focal range. The autofocus on the 24-70 vs the 24-85 seems to be very similar to me. Louis
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such! 1760 guests, 133 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
